ArticleCardiovascular engineering and technology2022
Simulating Radial Pressure Waveforms with a Mock Circulatory Flow Loop to Characterize Hemodynamic Monitoring Systems.
Article in Cardiovascular engineering and technology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review of Cardiovascular Mock Circulatory Loop Designs and Applications.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- A New Cardiovascular Mock Loop Driven by Novel Active Capacitance in Normal and Abnormal Conditions.Applied bionics and biomechanics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeMock circulatory loops (MCLs) can reproducibly generate physiologically relevant pressures and flows for cardiovascular device testing. These systems have been extensively used to characterize the performance of therapeutic cardiac devices, but historically MCLs have had limited use for assessing patient monitoring systems. Here, we adapted an MCL to include peripheral components and evaluated its utility for qualitative and quantitative benchtop testing of hemodynamic monitoring devices.
methodsAn MCL was designed to simulate three physiological hemodynamic states: normovolemia, cardiogenic shock, and hyperdynamic circulation. The system was assessed for stability in pressure and flow values over time, repeatability, waveform morphology, and systemic-peripheral pressure relationships.
resultsFor each condition, cardiac output was controlled to the nearest 0.2 L/min, and flow rate and mean arterial pressure remained stable and repeatable over a 60-s period (n = 5, standard deviation of ± 0.1 L/min and ± 0.84 mmHg, respectively). Transfer function analyses showed that the systemic-peripheral relationships could be adequately manipulated. The results from this MCL were comparable to those from other published MCLs and computational simulations. However, resolving current limitations of the system would further improve its utility. Three pulse contour analysis algorithms were applied to the pressure and flow data from the MCL to demonstrate the potential role of MCLs in characterizing hemodynamic monitoring systems.
conclusionOverall, the development of robust analysis methods in conjunction with modified MCLs can expand device testing applications to hemodynamic monitoring systems. Properly validated MCLs can create a stable and reproducible environment for testing patient monitoring systems over their entire operating ranges prior to clinical use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.